Shadowrun
Shadowrun Play => Rules and such => Topic started by: Gareth on <09-05-19/0503:41>
-
Do players get edge, or is it characters? (P.45 says players - does this include the GM?)
Do NPC's get edge?
Grunts get edge (P.203) and have limitations on how they spend it, but other bad guys aren't mentioned?
The printed bad guys don't have an edge score - so you presumably don't need an edge score to gain edge?
Spirits specifically cannot get edge, but they can spend it (since this is specified, does it imply that other NPCs can get edge?) (P.147)
Can AI's get edge? What about Pilots? And Hosts? Sprites (sprites are kind of an analog of spirits - do they follow the spirit rules here?)?
In the case of pilots, if they don't get edge, can I spend edge from my pool on their rolls? Does it use my edge pool for gains and losses?
Does the two edge gain limit per turn apply per character or per player?
-
Spirits you can give edge. Others like drones are not given that rule so they cannot spend edge and you cannot spend on their behalf. Prime runners are basically like players which means they have edge. Contacts don't need edge normally when in a run. It's the characters that have an edge score so when a player gets edge it's really their (one and only) character. GM is not a player, grunts and primes have their own rules on edge.
-
Others like drones are not given that rule so they cannot spend edge and you cannot spend on their behalf.
What happens when they gain edge?
Is it lost? Can they do nothing with it?
This makes the weapon range rules weird (AR/DR has sort of replaced range penalties in combat, and if one side cannot gain or use edge that makes range bands a little more weird)?
It's the characters that have an edge score so when a player gets edge it's really their (one and only) character
It's the characters that have edge scores, but crucially it's the players that get edge - not the characters (P.45)?
and primes have their own rules on edge.
I hope prime stat blocks are going to be clear that they are primes - the difference between primes and grunts is a deal where Edge is concerned,
Incidentally, do critters work like primes or grunts, or are they their own thing (or does it vary by the specific critter)?
-
You create Prime Runners through the normal chargen process, which means they have Edge.
Most Critters have 1 CM track, making them like grunts. Some have two, so then they're their own entity (and I'd argue that Dragons should have had an Edge stat).
If a Drone by itself were to gain Edge, it does nothing. Alternatively, you could houserule (*writes it down*) that edgeless entities get an extra die instead. If you're Jumped In and fight while being the drone, you'd gain edge.
"The players have a character they represent in the game (the player character, or PC)."
-
Grunts can earn Edge, too. There is no indicator that you need an Edge Attribute to accumulate Edge. And for Spirits, itīs actually spelled out that they canīt earn Edge (or rather, donīt want to? :P). Right now, deciding that autonomous Drones canīt get and use Edge is just as much of a houserule as deciding that they can.
And deciding that they canīt is obviously a very bad rule, because it further guts the premise of the Edge mechanic: Two Drones shooting at each other? "Yeah just ignore AR, DR and everything else. Streamlining, baby!"
Apart from that, Iīd say itīs generally a good practice for GMs (apart from any houserules that may or may not be needed here) to simply spend any Edge a Drone, Grunt, Critter etc gets right away on the very test that granted it. It reduces bookkeeping and itīs also a good a idea realism-wise.
-
Spirits you can give edge. Others like drones are not given that rule so they cannot spend edge and you cannot spend on their behalf. Prime runners are basically like players which means they have edge. Contacts don't need edge normally when in a run. It's the characters that have an edge score so when a player gets edge it's really their (one and only) character. GM is not a player, grunts and primes have their own rules on edge.
Actually....
Spirits cannot gain Edge for themselves or their
summoner, but they still have an Attack Rating in
case the defender gains Edge.
Drones do not have any similar rule, so arguably Spirits are unique in 6we in that they can only give away Edge to the opposition... they can never earn any via their own actions.
-
Alternatively that section could be read as 'Spirits can be given Edge in contrast to every other Edgeless thing'. So unless there's clarification or Pilots, Critters, Sprites all are given an Edge stat, I do not agree with drones earning edge on their own.
-
Alternatively that section could be read as 'Spirits can be given Edge in contrast to every other Edgeless thing'. So unless there's clarification or Pilots, Critters, Sprites all are given an Edge stat, I do not agree with drones earning edge on their own.
Maybe Drones can't earn edge for themselves, but there's no reason that a Rigger can't earn Edge via her drone(s).
OTOH, there's an explicit statement that Summoners don't gain edge thru what their spirits do.
-
If you're jumped in, you'd definitely be able to earn or spend Edge.
Treating a Rigger as a Lieutenant for an Edge-earning grunt group of Drones would be pretty amusing. But I need something more explicit than what the rules explicitly state, though I agree my opinion too is not supported enough.
-
Coincidentally, the drone combat example on p. 201 has a drone with AR 8 firing on a guard with DR 6, so no Edge is distributed to either side ... ::)
Iīd still say itīs most reasonable to let drones start with 0 Edge, but let them earn and spend additional Edge during a scene. Keep in mind that Edge is not supposed to be that kind "Fate Point"-style mechanic we are used to from 4th and 5th Edition anymore. Itīs supposed to simulate many effects that previously were just modifiers. If Drones canīt earn and use Edge, it means that they (or other characters attacking them) simply ignore a lot of these modifiers. Again, just imagine a couple of autonomous Drones fighting each other: With that ruling, they would basically ignore Armor, Recoil, Range and many other Advantages and Disadvantages because neither Drone could earn edge on its own.
(Not that this is the only situation were ill-conceived Edge-denial-rules make combat modifiers obsolete: "Hey Kids! Donīt wanna bother about Attack and Defense ratings? Just get a Rifle with an imaging Scope and shoot out of cover" ::))
-
Again, just imagine a couple of autonomous Drones fighting each other: With that ruling, they would basically ignore Armor, Recoil, Range and many other Advantages and Disadvantages because neither Drone could earn edge on its own.
I feel like this point about Armor/Recoil/etc. is a very important point.
Edge in 6E seems to be intended as a unified mechanism to handle all kinds of combat related penalties and advantages. It is not intended to be a "Fate/Hero/Inspiration" point equivalent. But if that is the case, then everything in the game that can fight should be able to gain and lose Edge. Carrying over Edge from scene to scene with an Edge rating might only be a player character thing, which is fair enough. Let's face it, in most situations its really only player characters where that even matters. But the Edge mechanic represents too many things in the game fiction that are universally applicable to be then restricted to just certain participants.
The "fate/hero/inspiration" concept creeps in on the boundaries in the current rules. "Spirits don't gain edge" is an example. This conversation about drones is another. I feel many of the questions raised about Edge all arise from these places where the rules seem to be "backing away" from Edge as a universal mechanic and retreating to Edge as this cool thing players can use to make their characters awesome.
-
I do agree that 2 drones firing at each other should have a use for AR vs DR, so I'm leaning towards 'Edge for Drones simply translates to immediate extra dice (aka rerolls, but you just roll them along the normal pool)'. Wondering if we'll get some sort of FAQ item addressing this, we'll see in time I guess.
-
What doesn't make sense about drones being able to bank edge just like any other sort of NPC?
Would you object to a host generating edge from a hacker? Potentially storing it up, and unleashing it in chunks later down the pike when the IC launches for edge boosts and matrix edge actions?
-
Yes, I would. ESPECIALLY for Hosts, which should just try to smash you anyway. They don't need that boost in lethality that banking gives them. But also for dog brains that don't think that far ahead and would just immediately cash in the advantage. Is it sentient? Then it can save up the Edge. Otherwise it should immediately be processed. They're not full NPCs. They're tools.
As for what also doesn't make sense: streamlining. Introducing detailed rules for tracking how Drones use their Edge, wouldn't be streamlined. Letting the player decide opens up abuse venues and makes little sense since they're not the drones. And letting the GM decide will make players very grumpy. So spend-like-X-at-once makes far more sense as flat rule.
-
Yes, I would. ESPECIALLY for Hosts, which should just try to smash you anyway. They don't need that boost in lethality that banking gives them. But also for dog brains that don't think that far ahead and would just immediately cash in the advantage. Is it sentient? Then it can save up the Edge. Otherwise it should immediately be processed. They're not full NPCs. They're tools.
By the same logic then, critters like basilisks and guard dogs shouldn't be allowed to bank edge, either?
-
Only if you insist on taking the term dog brain literally.
Are they anything other than a tool? Do they make decisions on their own? Or are they a slave to their programming?
If the GM has full control and it makes its own decisions and does not just get directly controlled, then it's an actual NPC and is allowed to think tactical. But unless you introduce a Tactical Autosoft, no I do not believe Drones, Hosts or IC should save up Edge. They're one track minds: Destroy is the word. Spend it or lose it.
-
A high rating Pilot program is smarter than any dog. Probably many Trogs :D
-
Anyone who thinks drones could ever be truly smarter than critters, no matter their Pilot level, instead of simply following their programming, has never had pets and something the pets wanted but weren't allowed to have in the same house together. ::) That sort of creativity and non-linear thinking is only available to AIs.
-
Nice to see that the discussion already shifted from "Can Drones (and critters, hosts etc.) earn Edge" to "Can they use it wisely or do they always ause Edge in a hand-to-mouth fashion?"
Little side note: Pooling Edge usually isnīt a good strategy for autonomous Drones anyways. They dontīt have huge dice pools and no Edge Attribute, so rerolling failures or adding explosive dice is either not possible or not worth it, compared to just rerolling hits of the opposition. The most interesting things they could do besidesthat is Anticipate and a few other Edge Attack Actions and maybe the +3 Initiative Boost. Iīd say that these are open for Dog-Brains as well, but only when they are explicitly instructed to save and use their accumulated advantages in this fashion instead of just spendig them straight away.
Same for Hosts (assuming that they can accumulate Edge, which I definitely support) as well, only that the "reroll failures" edge boost is stronger here. Itīs a good houserule standard procedure if the default host just uses a simple "hand to mouth" strategy, i.e. uses every point of Edge to reroll dice straight away. However, some hosts may have been adjusted by their owners (or creative security spiders) to employ a different strategy, like provoking mistakes and glitches (i.e. the host pools Edge to use the "count 2 as 1" Edge boost) or priorizing tracking (i.e the host pools Edge to enhance Track IC). This is something a GM could/should note in advance, in addition to other details of the host settings, like IC loadout.
Think that gives too much power to hosts? Well, keep in mind that these are controlled by GM caprice anyways. If the GM decides that the host is using Edge in a certain strategic fashion and uses this to give the decker a harder time than usual, (s)he could have achieved just the same by simply increasing the host attributes ;)
-
Anyone who thinks drones could ever be truly smarter than critters, no matter their Pilot level, instead of simply following their programming, has never had pets and something the pets wanted but weren't allowed to have in the same house together. ::) That sort of creativity and non-linear thinking is only available to AIs.
I find it hard to believe that there is nothing bridging the gap between programs and AI,
Regardless, look at the coding of the enemy in RTS games (or chess computers) and how it has been improved over the last few decades. Sure, its primitive and everything has to be coded in, but they can be very sophisticated,
And consider that the best "dog brains" are likely coded by AIs...
Not dissing animal intelligence here at all, but this is scifi and perhaps you are underestimating the potential of technology,
-
If the Drone is running a Tactics Autosoft that's specifically designed to think further ahead in tactical situations, then sure you could probably program it to do something with Edge. But a normal drone, I vehemently disagree, even if it's a Pilot 4.
And again, since drones are not full NPCs, you open up the door for players trying to lay claim to that Edge and abusing drones as edge factories for themselves, since giving Edge to others is not a 'bonus' you earn so would be reasonably excluded from the max-2 limit. I'm fine with players passing Edge to the Decker for getting that crucial hack in, but not fine with allowing players to argue they can throw a bunch of weak drones at their enemies, firing 1 at a time to earn 2 Edge, then all passing 1 Edge to the player. So unless we get VERY explicit rules governing exactly how Drones can use Edge, I would only allow them to immediately spend it on their own rolls, not ever save it up.
Full NPCs, no problem. An AI, a critter (for most of those I'd follow full grunt rules anyway), sure they can save it up. But not the mere simulacrum of intelligence that is nothing other than "the built-in programming the vehicle has to move itself and respond to surrounding conditions." If it's beyond that, chances are you're already dealing with a real AI, which is not something you want running your drones and would not be directly under your control.
-
This interpretation of Edge as being something that strictly requires sentience and conscious planning to use effectively is, I believe, not supported by the CRB.
It defines Edge as follows: Much of Shadowrun, Sixth World is structured around gaining and using Edge. One way to think of Edge is building up tactical advantages that culminate in a sudden move toward victory. Its Muhammad Ali playing rope-a-dope with George Foreman for five rounds before turning it around and going aggressively toward an eighth-round knockout. Its soon-to-be Emperor Babur at Panipat using speed and training to envelop a superior force until they were so battered that they could be swept away. Its both what you plan for and the unexpected moment when you seize an opportunity and make it your own.
(Emphasis mine.) Drones and spirits can get lucky just as easily as anyone else can.
Furthermore, many of the Edge actions are described in only abstract form -- "re-roll a die, turn a 4 into a 5" -- that are as easily described by luck as they are by planning.
So in the CRB I see no hard requirement to tie Edge use, or the form of Edge use, to the intelligence level or planning capability of the entity that has it.
Edit - formatting
-
Are we arguing if drones don't compare AR vs DR...? Of course they do. There is even a supportive example of this on p. 201 (but in this case AR vs DR was too close to yield edge in any direction).
If their AR is 4 points higher than the defender DR then they will gain an edge which mean that they get to for example re-roll one dice.
Spirits would follow the same rules as drones if it wasn't for the fact that there is an explicit rule for Spirits
p. 147 Spirits and Edge
Spirits cannot gain Edge for themselves or their summoner, but they still have an Attack Rating in case the defender gains Edge. Their summoner or an ally can spend 2 Edge to give the spirit 1 Edge as per normal rules, which the spirit can then use normally. The spirit must be within (Force x 10) meters of anyone who wishes to give it Edge.
No such rule exist for drones.
-
Are we arguing if drones don't compare AR vs DR...? Of course they do. There is even a supportive example of this on p. 201 (but in this case AR vs DR was too close to yield edge in any direction).
No. Were discussing what happens to the Edge after they earn it (from AR-versus-DR, or any other mechanic.)
-
For me, this is less of a rules question and more of a GM-best-practice question. Granted, Iīm usually GMing myself ;)
About the potential players cheesing around-problem: Keep in mind that the GM has the final say about the tactical choices of a Drone, Spirit or other "pet" a player deploys. The players gives them orders and maybe some suggestion on how the GM might interpret that order when it comes to specific things like Edge use.
Hereīs what Iīd do (assuming that Drones can earn and use Edge no, screw that. They can, plain and simple. If someone at CGL decides to disimprove that by putting out clarification on Drones not being able to earn their own Edge via Errata or Rigger 6.0 or whatnot, Iīm going to houserule it anyway...):
- The default strategy is "hand to mouth", i.e. using Edge on the same Action that made them earn it. If possible, they will reroll their opponentīs dice, then their own. If using Edge offers no benefit at all (f.i. when an Attacker misses anyways), the Edge is safed, but used at the next possible opportunity. If the drone has no specific order that might suggest another use of Edge, thatīs how they will always do it.
- If the drone has a a specific order (and is smart enough to understand the ramifications of that order), they might decide to safe up Edge for something else. Examples:
- "Drone Alpha, try not to get hit" -> Beep Boop Beep, I better take cover. Also, I should save the point of Edge from my next shot for my defense tests.
- "Drone Beta, help get Drone Gamma a better shot." -> Beep Boop Beep, I should give Edge to Drone Gamma. (Thereīs other ways to interpret this order, though. But itīs a valid interpretation. Thereīs also enough to possible ingame explanation - sharing target data, flanking etc. - to not rule this out as "unrealistic")
- "Drone Gamma, wait until you have the enemies position and then shoot them all at once" -> Beep Boop Beep, I should safe up until I have enough Edge to use Anticipation. (Thatīs something I would only allow for smarter Combat Drones. Itīs quite iconic for drones to use Anticipatory attacks, though.)
- When in doubt, the GM can always demand a test from the Drone to determine how well the order has been understood.
-
And about hosts (and unsupervised devices) defendin against hackers:
- Iīd say that they act pretty much the same by default: First reroll hits of the opposition, then reroll failures, safe up for the next hacking defense tests if the current test canīt be improved by Edge anymore (which can be easily explained by the device/host getting spooked by the sloppy hacking attempt)
- However, itīs worth noting that with the "default" option to reroll dice, itīs not a total no-brainer to first reroll the hits of the opposition and then reroll your own failures, because the hits of your defense tests are also added to the hackerīs OS. A computer-savvy character or a security spider might decide to rely more on OS and configure the host/device to priorize getting hits over denying hits. Itīs up to you if this is really a valid strategy, but itīs somewhat reasonable. I doubt that runners will like that approach, because you are pretty much relying on the The Man ;)
- If the hacker/spider is really good and/or likes unconventional approaches, (s)he might configure the host/device to employ a different Edge strategy at the GMīs discretion. Examples might include:
- Priorizing defense against certain Matrix Actions, f.i. Traces (i.e. saving up Edge from other defense test to defend against that specific action)
- Luring attackers into glitches and mistakes (i.e. pooling Edge to use the "Count 2s as 1s Edge boost" whenever possible)
- Priorizing offense over defense (i.e. saving Edge to be used by the ICīs counterattacks... Wait, do hosts and their IC share an Edge pool? Well, i just decided they do. Makes sense, doesnīt it? ::))
-
Only 1 Edge Expenditure per action: Cannot both reroll own and opponent dice, need to pick.
-
Only 1 Edge Expenditure per action: Cannot both reroll own and opponent dice, need to pick.
Arguably, you can spend X edge to reroll X dice... A of your own and B of the opponent's so long as A+B=X
-
I recall being told explicitly it's either one or the other, though.
-
Both kinds of rerolls are listed under the same boost, so you should be able to mix and match
Reroll one die: Pick any die and reroll it. It can be yours or your opponents, but the result stands no matter what you roll. This is done after all rolls have been made.
Oh no wait, buried in the wall of text at the start of the edge section (emphasis mine):
Characters can only have one expenditure of Edge per round action. That expenditure cannot include multiple boosts or actions, or a combination of the two, but the same boost can be multiplied if the player wishes (e.g., spending one Edge allows the player to reroll one die; they could spend two to reroll two dice). In those cases, the expenditure of Edge must apply to the same rollyou cannot, for example, buy a reroll on your test and also on your opponents test.
-
Good spot. The default Edge Boost has its limitations after all ;)
In that case, feel free to change
If possible, they will reroll their opponentīs dice, then their own
to
If possible, they will reroll their opponentīs dice. If there are no hits on the oppositions side, they will use Edge to reroll their own Dice.
It doesnt change that much about my suggested hand to mouth-doctrine, though. In some cases, the drone (or host, critter etc.) might safe up a point of Edge, but it will use it on the next opportunity it gets (unless its orders - or, in the case of critters, itsinstincts) suggests otherwise.
-
Little addition to this: This discussion about drones, hosts, critters etc. being able to gain and spend Edge highlights another general problem with Edge replacing modifiers thatīs worth discussing: What if there really is no one to grant that Edge to? For Drones, Critters and IC, you can argue that these are Entities in Combat with their own stats, Initiative etc. For hosts and (unsupervised) devices in hacking tests, itīs already a bit trickier, but at least they have stats, defense rolls etc. Again, Iīd argue that, yes, these can earn Edge as well, reflecting their Firewalls getting more watchful etc. (and usually spend it right away, because otherweise it would turn somewhat esoteric and hard for the GM to track).
But in other situations, this gets harder and harder to justify. Shooting at inanimate stuff in bad lighting conditions, trying to climb a fence thatīs slippery from rain - in these situations, there is no one you can give Edge to to reflect what would have been a dice pool modifier. So, what do? The obvious answer is to either default to a dice pool modifier or raise the Threshold. I mean, why not? Thatīs what GMs are for. But I have another suggestion/houserule/GM technique (call it whatever you want) that taps better into one of the actual strengths of the Edge System - being a narrative tool.
Narrative Edge
Short version: You, the GM, get your own Edge pool to pester your PC with create interesting challenges and narratives
Long version: You start the Session with a moderate amount of Narrative Edge on your side of the table (f.i. one point of Edge per PC?). Whenever the PCs "test their luck" by doing something under disadvantagous conditions and there is no NPC you can give that point of Edge to, add it to your own pool. You can use it like the kind of all-mighty story-telling demigod you are. Of course, you should use that power wisely and, if possible, give a little in-game explanation on why you chose to spend your Narrative Edge in a certain way. For starters, I suggest you stick to these 4 Edge boosts:
- Reroll Dice: The default option, see above. Restrict the use of this boost to situations where the Players are actually in a disadvantagous situation that helped you earn narrative Edge in the first place, f.i. the "Climbing a wet fence" situation.
- Give Edge to an ally: You are the GM and not an NPC, so you canīt spend Edge directly for the Opposition. But you can spend 2 Edge to give 1 to them. Possible ingame explanations: The guards already got suspicious, or the negotiator can spot the dirt from that wet fence on your pants...
- Steal Edge from a PC: Pay 2, take 1 from a player. Note that itīs usually not fun when you take stuff from players. This should only be employed as a direct consequence of ill-advised or reckless PCs actions and not as a tactical GM tool to curb "edgy" players (or even for vengeance purposes).
- Special Effects: Pay 5, create some unexpected troubles for the players. My personal favourite. Itīs often advised to add some complications to a run, especially when things go too smoothly - random traffic stops, unexpected changes to security protocolls, nosy civilians, that kind of stuff. But as a GM, I always have troubles to get the right moment to bring these up in a way that doesnīt look like Iīm just adding complications for the hell of it. Narrative Edge might be just the right tool here ;)
-
Pffft. I see what youre going for but I already got infinity in my GM Edge pool :)
-
I used to joke in 5e games that every edge players spend ought to go to the GM to use for NPCs.
-
Pffft. I see what youre going for but I already got infinity in my GM Edge pool :)
True, as a GM, you can ramp up the challange as you please anyways. But itīs nice to have something in your toolbox that helps you find the right measures and justify some dirty tricks besides "Iīm the GM, I can do whatever I want". ;D
TBH, I was actually expecting that "GM Edge" would be a thing in the RAW when I first heard about the new Edge mechanic. Kind of a missed opportunity IMO ::)
-
Game mechanic wise I don't think you normally gain a tactical advantage in situations where you are not opposed (firing at an inanimate object, for example) and since you are not opposed there is also no one on the opposing side that can gain a tactical advantage over you (it doesn't make sense that an inanimate object may gain a tactical advantage over you).
Having said that, there might still also be situations where you gain edge from having the correct equipment or argumentation, no matter if your test is directly opposed or not.
But I agree that rather than using (or in combination of using) thresholds or situational modifiers it could maybe be interesting if you could reroll one of the hits for the player to simulate that the inanimate object got a tactical advantage over you. Try it out and report back how it felt ;)
-
Game mechanic wise I don't think you normally gain a tactical advantage in situations where you are not opposed (firing at an inanimate object, for example) and since you are not opposed there is also no one on the opposing side that can gain a tactical advantage over you (it doesn't make sense that an inanimate object may gain a tactical advantage over you).
Having said that, there might still also be situations where you gain edge from having the correct equipment or argumentation, no matter if your test is directly opposed or not.
But I agree that rather than using (or in combination of using) thresholds or situational modifiers it could maybe be interesting if you could reroll one of the hits for the player to simulate that the inanimate object got a tactical advantage over you. Try it out and report back how it felt ;)
+1.
Edge is about relative advantages, and if there's no opposition there's no edge to gain. Factors that would complicate things like non-competitive target shooting would best be represented by thresholds. All that being said... house rules are fun. Edge got to be the way it is in 6we by growing into more and more applications; no reason you couldn't try your ideas out.
-
Interesting. Reminds me of the Threat mechanic from Star Trek Adventures. If you wanted to pursue that, they have a few options that might be compatible. Similar idea, can be used for adding complications, reinforcements, etc. Maybe better for Anarchy, since STA is a narrative game by design.